Advance ruling barred by pending GST investigation where DGGI search proceedings covered the same questions raised.

An advance ruling application is not maintainable where the same questions are already pending in proceedings against the applicant. The term "proceedings" was read broadly in light of the extended scope of Section 83(1) of the CGST Act to include inspection, search and seizure actions. Since DGGI had already initiated and was continuing an investigation into alleged short payment of GST on supplies made to joint ventures as a sub-contractor, and no show cause notice had yet been issued, the authority treated the investigation as pending proceedings on the very issues raised. The application was therefore barred by the first proviso to Section 98(2) and rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the advance ruling application was barred by the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 because proceedings relating to the same questions were already pending in an investigation conducted by DGGI.

Analysis: The application for advance ruling is not admissible where the question raised is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of the applicant. The expression "proceedings" was construed in light of the expanded scope of Section 83(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which includes the chapter dealing with inspection, search and seizure. On the facts, DGGI had already initiated investigation and search action concerning short payment of GST on supplies made to joint ventures as a sub-contractor, and the investigating authority confirmed that the investigation was still pending and no show cause notice had been issued. The pending investigation was therefore treated as pending proceedings concerning the very questions raised in the application.

Conclusion: The application was barred by the first proviso to Section 98(2) and was rejected as not maintainable.

---